Trans people must accept perceived reduced rights, EHRC commissioner
Speaking at a debate about the repercussions of April's ruling by the Supreme Court, Akua Reindorf said trans people have been misled and 'lied to over many years' about what their rights actually were.
Reindorf, a barrister who is one of eight commissioners at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and is drawing up the official post-ruling guidance, added that there 'has to be a period of correction' and believes the fault lay with trans lobbyists.
Reindorf was reportedly speaking in a personal capacity, but has been criticised as the director of the trans campaign group TransActual said the commissioner's remarks were profoundly unhelpful.
READ MORE: John Swinney defends 'two-horse race' comments after by-election loss to Labour
Human rights campaign groups Liberty and Amnesty have also called on the EHRC to safeguard the rights of trans people and to make sure they are properly considered when it draws up guidance for public bodies on how to implement the changed legal landscape.
Speaking at an event organised by the London School of Economics law school, Reindorf argued that the impact of the ruling was clear.
Reindorf condemned what she called 'this huge farce with organisations up and down the country wringing their hands and creating working groups and so on, and people in society worrying that they will have nowhere to go to the toilet'.
Asked by an audience member about worries the ruling could reduce the rights of trans people, another panellist, the barrister Naomi Cunningham, reportedly said trans people 'will have to give way'.
Cunningham added: 'It can't be helped, I'm afraid.'
Reindorf then agreed, as she said: 'Unfortunately, young people and trans people have been lied to over many years about what their rights are.
'It's like Naomi said – I just can't say it in a more diplomatic way than that.
'They have been lied to, and there has to be a period of correction, because other people have rights.'
Reindorf said her comments reflected the fact that before the ruling, the law had been commonly misunderstood because pressure groups argued that trans people who self-identified should be treated as their identified sex, when this was in fact just the case for people with a gender recognition certificate (GRC).
Reindorf added that the Supreme Court decided that this mix of different rights made the Equality Act unworkable and called it 'the catalyst for many to catch up, belatedly, with the fact that the law never permitted self-ID in the first place'.
She said: 'The fact is that, until now, trans people without GRCs were being grievously misled about their legal rights.
'The correction of self-ID policies and practices will inevitably feel like a loss of rights for trans people.
'This unfortunate position is overwhelmingly a product of the misinformation which was systematically disseminated over a long period by lobby groups and activists.'
In April, the EHRC released interim, non-statutory advice about how to interpret the ruling, which set out that transgender people should not be allowed to use toilets of the gender they live as, and that in some cases they cannot use toilets of their birth sex.
A number of critics have since called the advice oversimplistic, with legal campaign groups saying they plan on challenging the verdict.
Chiara Capraro, head of gender justice at Amnesty International UK, said: 'The EHRC has the duty to uphold the rights of everyone, including all with protected characteristics. We are concerned that it is failing to do so and is unhelpfully pitting the rights of women and trans people against each other.'
Akiko Hart, Liberty's director, said: 'Any updated guidance from the EHRC must respect and uphold the rights of everyone in society. The supreme court's judgment was very narrow, and there are a lot of very legitimate questions about how it's implemented that must be carefully considered.'
A director of the trans campaign group TransActual, Jane Fae, rejected Reindorf's argument, stating: 'The characterisation of what was previously a widely held view both by the EHRC as well as by civil servants and lawyers working in the field of equality as 'lying' is profoundly unhelpful.
'Prior to the ruling of the supreme court in April, trans people just wanted to live their lives within the framework as it was understood.
''Activism' has only really come into being over the last few years in response to a never-ending campaign designed to deprive trans people of rights.'
A spokesperson for the EHRC said: 'Akua Reindorf KC spoke at this event in a personal capacity. This was made clear at the event and in the video recording published online.
'As Britain's equality regulator, the Equality and Human Rights Commission upholds and enforces the Equality Act 2010 to ensure everyone is treated fairly, consistent with the act.
'Our board come from all walks of life and bring with them a breadth of skills and experience. This helps us take impartial decisions, which are always based on evidence and the law.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trans lobby groups 'lied for years' that anyone self identifying as a different gender could access women's' toilets, equality chief says
Transgender people were misled about their rights to female only spaces by lobby groups, according to a senior member of an equality watchdog has said. In April a Supreme Court ruling confirmed the terms woman and sex in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'. Akua Reindorf, a barrister who is one of eight commissioners at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said trans people had been deceived about their rights were. Speaking in a personal capacity during a debate about the recent ruling, she said there must be a 'period of correction' to acknowledge women's right to women-only spaces. The decision made it legal for trans people to be banned from women-only sports teams, and from using bathrooms and changing rooms for the gender they lived as. These terms were later supported by interim non-statutory advice given by the EHRC last April. When an audience member at the debate raised fears about the recent Supreme Court ruling and how it could strip away trans peoples rights, barrister and panellist, Naomi Cunningham said: 'It can't be helped, I'm afraid.' In agreement with her fellow panellist, Ms Reindorf said she believed trans lobbyists were at faults for the misunderstanding. 'Unfortunately, young people and trans people have been lied to over many years about what their rights are,' she said. 'It's like Naomi said – I just can't say it in a more diplomatic way than that. They have been lied to, and there has to be a period of correction, because other people have rights' She claimed it boiled down to the law prior to the Supreme Court ruling being misunderstood due to groups contending trans people who self-identified should be treated as their preferred gender. However, this was only the case for the those who had obtained a gender recognition certificate (GRC). The barrister said the amalgamation of different rights made the Equality Act nonviable from a personal capacity. 'The catalyst for many to catch up, belatedly, with the fact that the law never permitted self-ID in the first place,' she said. As such, the feeling of a loss of right of trans people was due to an overwhelming product of 'misinformation' perpetrated by 'lobby group and activists'. Author JK Rowling backed the barrister's recent comments, saying lobby groups lied 'about what the law said'.' However, the head of gender justice at Amnesty International UK, Chiara Capraro, hit back Ms Reindorf's comments. She said: 'The EHRC has the duty to uphold the rights of everyone, including all with protected characteristics. We are concerned that it is failing to do so and is unhelpfully pitting the rights of women and trans people against each other.' A spokesman for the EHRC told The Guardian: 'Akua Reindorf KC spoke at this event in a personal capacity. This was made clear at the event and in the video recording published online. 'As Britain's equality regulator, the Equality and Human Rights Commission upholds and enforces the Equality Act 2010 to ensure everyone is treated fairly, consistent with the Act. 'Our board come from all walks of life and bring with them a breadth of skills and experience. This helps us take impartial decisions, which are always based on evidence and the law.'
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trans people have been lied to on legal rights, says equalities chief
Transgender people must accept a 'period of correction' over their rights after the Supreme Court ruling on gender because they have been 'lied to' about their legal status for years, an equalities chief says. Akua Reindorf, who is drafting guidance on how to treat trans people following April's ruling on the definition of a woman, added that the blame lay with their lobbyists. Ms Reindorf, a barrister and one of eight commissioners on the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), made her remarks in a personal capacity during a debate hosted by the London School of Economics. She said: 'Unfortunately, young people and trans people have been lied to over many years about what their rights are.' The EHRC has been given the task of developing new guidelines on transgender people for public buildings such as cafes, schools and hospitals, after the Supreme Court ruled transgender women are not legally women. Shortly after the ruling the EHRC released interim guidance advising: 'Trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities.' Ms Reindorf's words came as the NHS Confederation, which represents hospital trusts, scrapped its old guidance allowing transgender patients to use the toilets of the sex they identify with. A spokesman for the NHS Confederation said their old guidance is now 'dated' and requires updating to align with the Supreme Court ruling. The two developments will be seen as a major blow to transgender activists, who have been petitioning for public organisations such as the NHS to ignore the court's decision. The Girl Guides and Refuge, the largest domestic abuse charity for women, have both said they have no intention in changing their policy on allowing trans women to use their female facilities. Ms Reindorf described their approach as ridiculous, arguing it amounted to a 'huge farce'. She said transgender people 'have been lied to and there has to be a period of correction'. She added: 'The fact is that, until now, trans people without Gender Recognition Certificates, were being grievously misled about their legal rights. 'The correction of self-ID policies and practices will inevitably feel like a loss of rights for trans people. 'This unfortunate position is overwhelmingly a product of the misinformation which was systematically disseminated over a long period by lobby groups and activists.'
The Independent
7 hours ago
- The Independent
Supreme Court will hear Alabama appeal in bid to execute man found to be intellectually disabled
The Supreme Court will consider making it harder for convicted murderers to show their lives should be spared because they are intellectually disabled, according an order released early on Friday after an apparent technological glitch. The justices' action comes in an appeal from Alabama, which is seeking to execute Joseph Clifton Smith. He was sentenced to death for killing a man in 1997. Lower federal courts found Smith is intellectually disabled and thus can't be executed. When it's argued in the fall, the case could be the first in which the Supreme Court cuts back on its 23-year-old landmark ruling that barred the death penalty for people who are intellectually disabled. At issue is what happens in borderline cases, when scores on IQ tests are slightly above 70, which is widely accepted as a marker of intellectual disability. In 2014 and 2017, the court somewhat eased the burden of showing intellectual disability in those cases. It's the second time in about a year that an online error resulted in an early release from the high court. An opinion in an abortion case was accidently posted on its website a day early in June 2024. The court's landmark opinion overturning abortion as a constitutional right also went out early, though those circumstances were different because the case was leaked. This time, the court released a set of orders set for Monday after an 'apparent software malfunction' sent out early notifications.
